INDIANAPOLIS -- Romeo Crennel could get fined and the Chiefs stripped of a draft choice for comments their head coach made at the NFL scouting combine.

Crennel may have run afoul of the league’s policy on tampering with his comments on two quarterbacks who play for other teams, Peyton Manning of Indianapolis and Chad Henne of Miami. During a news conference, Crennel was asked about possible Chiefs interest in both players.

On Manning, who is under contract with the Colts but soon could be released, Crennel said, “I’m not supposed to talk about anyone else’s players. He’s still a player with Indianapolis. But with a talent like that, I would be crazy not to consider it if he were available. I’ll leave it at that.”

Henne, a potential unrestricted free agent, played last season for new Chiefs offensive coordinator Brian Daboll. On Henne, Crennel said, “Because of his relationship with Daboll, I think that would be a consideration. To say right now that would be the case, I’m not ready to do that.”

The NFL’s policy on tampering covers public statements made by team officials. It reads in part:

“Any public or private statement of interest, qualified or unqualified, in another club’s player to that player’s agent or representative, or to a member of the news media, is a violation of this Anti-Tampering Policy. (Example of a prohibited comment: “He’s an excellent player, and we’d very much like to have him if he were available, but another club holds his rights.”)”

The Chiefs last year won a tampering claim against the Detroit Lions involving former safety Jarrad Page. They swapped draft picks with the Lions in the fifth round of last year’s draft, allowing them to move up 14 spots.

He's supposed to say "Manning plays for the Colts so the question is moot."

No, really that's what he's supposed to say.

Shogun

02-26-2012, 10:28 PM

MOVE THE TEAM TO LA ALREADY

wait wut

dj56dt58

02-26-2012, 10:29 PM

So coaches are supposed to talk to the media, yet when they answer their questions they get fined and have a draft pick taken away? Fuck you NFL

morphius

02-26-2012, 10:30 PM

I wondered about it as soon as I heard the comment. Oh joy.

BigRock

02-26-2012, 10:30 PM

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/34988765

an NFL spokesperson told CBSSports.com that the league would not consider what Crennel said tampering.

Nice investigation, Teicher.

Stop, Chiefs

02-26-2012, 10:31 PM

The laughs never end with the FO of this organization

"And then that fat fuck said WHAT?"

http://i43.tinypic.com/2d9zi92.jpg

DaWolf

02-26-2012, 10:32 PM

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/34988765

Nice investigation, Teicher.

Wow, nice find. End thread...

Chiefs Pantalones

02-26-2012, 10:33 PM

Whew thankfully

BossChief

02-26-2012, 10:34 PM

In this instance, if this little edge helps us get the jump on the situation that leads to us signing Peyton Fucking Manning. I really don't care what pick they take from us except if it's like a third or higher.

FAX

02-26-2012, 10:37 PM

Whew thankfully

Ditto on the whew.

FAX

BossChief

02-26-2012, 10:48 PM

Cool.

xztop12

02-26-2012, 10:53 PM

That's cool. If I ever become a reporter in Oakland or Denver, I'm just going to spam the coach with questions about players on other teams rosters.

chiefzilla1501

02-26-2012, 10:55 PM

That's cool. If I ever become a reporter in Oakland or Denver, I'm just going to spam the coach with questions about players on other teams rosters.

Focus on Denver. Oakland never has picks they can give up. If you compare any Chiefs' player to Jesus, you might be able to convince one of Denver's players to do all kinds of tampering.

DA_T_84

02-26-2012, 10:58 PM

Can we edit the title of the thread?

Save a lot of nuts from being hooked.

aturnis

02-26-2012, 10:59 PM

Fuck. When I read those comments, I knew he had potentially crossed the line. Surprised it took this long to get negative for us.

Billay

02-26-2012, 11:00 PM

They better fucking sign him.

ForeverChiefs58

02-26-2012, 11:02 PM

As punishment we should have to switch picks with Indy or Miami. That would sure teach em.

BossChief

02-26-2012, 11:24 PM

They better fucking sign him.

There sure is a lot of smoke...

clyde05

02-26-2012, 11:41 PM

If we get manning they can have a couple draft picks for all I care

Epic Fail 007

02-26-2012, 11:49 PM

Theres nothing to this The stupid star is just diggin for a story like always.

mikey23545

02-26-2012, 11:49 PM

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/34988765

Nice investigation, Teicher.

LMAO

Look at all the habitual BB cockbiters immediately piling on without even knowing what they were talking about...Led by King of the Cockbites, GoSuck...

I love it! LMAOLMAOLMAOLMAO

crazycoffey

02-27-2012, 12:13 AM

So coaches are supposed to talk to the media, yet when they answer their questions they get fined and have a draft pick taken away? Fuck you NFL

I swear, if I was a player or a coach I would go to my mandatory media meetings and I say, "I have no comment at this time" to every question.

Bowser

02-27-2012, 01:20 AM

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/02/26/3454035/crennels-comments-could-cost-chiefs.html#storylink=cpy
At first I was like :eek:

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/34988765

Nice investigation, Teicher.Then I was like :facepalm:

KCUnited

02-27-2012, 05:25 AM

Of course it would happen the one year we could actually use a late round TE

BoneKrusher

02-27-2012, 05:51 AM

man o man

malachi47000

02-27-2012, 06:53 AM

counting the days till general manager Martin Mayhew goes public with complaints that they were dinged and the Chiefs weren't......

Cunningham said back in February 2011:

"(Kansas City) keeps wanting to dump their players. I would like to be there to catch a lot of them because I know a couple of those guys."

Crennel said recently:

"I’m not supposed to talk about anybody else’s players, and he’s still a player with Indianapolis," Crennel said, "but with a talent like that, I would be crazy not to consider it, if he were available. So I'll leave it at that."

Deberg_1990

02-27-2012, 07:06 AM

No worries, Romeo is worth more than any top 5 draft pick.

loochy

02-27-2012, 07:30 AM

"And then that fat fuck said WHAT?"

http://i43.tinypic.com/2d9zi92.jpg

Oh, he shaved

htismaqe

02-27-2012, 07:36 AM

I don't really want to lose draft picks but I don't understand how the league can say this isn't tampering.

The example cited in the policy is “He’s an excellent player, and we’d very much like to have him if he were available, but another club holds his rights.”

How is that not EXACTLY what Romeo said about Manning?

Coogs

02-27-2012, 08:20 AM

I don't really want to lose draft picks but I don't understand how the league can say this isn't tampering.

The example cited in the policy is “He’s an excellent player, and we’d very much like to have him if he were available, but another club holds his rights.”

How is that not EXACTLY what Romeo said about Manning?

OK, so how is Dallas different on Carr? Technically we should be the only team able to negotiate with Carr up until the new season opens, correct? With Dallas officially throwing their hat in the ring, doesn't that constitute tampering to a degree too?

htismaqe

02-27-2012, 08:43 AM

OK, so how is Dallas different on Carr? Technically we should be the only team able to negotiate with Carr up until the new season opens, correct? With Dallas officially throwing their hat in the ring, doesn't that constitute tampering to a degree too?

Absolutely.

RUSH

02-27-2012, 08:43 AM

OK, so how is Dallas different on Carr? Technically we should be the only team able to negotiate with Carr up until the new season opens, correct? With Dallas officially throwing their hat in the ring, doesn't that constitute tampering to a degree too?

No unless I missed a quote from someone from Dallas confirming their interest.

No one from the cowboys has publicly said that they want Brandon Carr. Those are just reports that they are interested.

Epic Fail 007

02-27-2012, 09:24 AM

See I told everyone when this was posted there was nothing to this. Today the nfl says they not consider this tampering. LOL The star just tryin to stir up shit as always.

Epic Fail 007

02-27-2012, 09:29 AM

Wow poe runs a 4.87 at 346. I would not mind at all if chiefs drafted him.

Chiefnj2

02-27-2012, 09:30 AM

Lets assemble every agent and club personnel into 1 area one week before the start of free agency and pretend negotiations aren't occurring.

Mr. Laz

02-27-2012, 09:31 AM

LMAO

Look at all the habitual BB cockbiters immediately piling on without even knowing what they were talking about...Led by King of the Cockbites, GoSuck...

I love it! LMAOLMAOLMAOLMAO
this

Brock

02-27-2012, 09:33 AM

Lets assemble every agent and club personnel into 1 area one week before the start of free agency and pretend negotiations aren't occurring.

LMAO

DaKCMan AP

02-27-2012, 09:43 AM

counting the days till general manager Martin Mayhew goes public with complaints that they were dinged and the Chiefs weren't......

Cunningham said back in February 2011:

"(Kansas City) keeps wanting to dump their players. I would like to be there to catch a lot of them because I know a couple of those guys."

Crennel said recently:

"I’m not supposed to talk about anybody else’s players, and he’s still a player with Indianapolis," Crennel said, "but with a talent like that, I would be crazy not to consider it, if he were available. So I'll leave it at that."

I don't really want to lose draft picks but I don't understand how the league can say this isn't tampering.

The example cited in the policy is “He’s an excellent player, and we’d very much like to have him if he were available, but another club holds his rights.”

How is that not EXACTLY what Romeo said about Manning?

The main difference I see is both the Gunther quote and the NFL tampering example include the individual stating they want the player. "I would like to be there to catch a lot of them" and "we'd very much like to have him if he were available" indicate wanting the player and signing him if available.

Crennel's quote didn't go that far. He said "I would be crazy not to consider it, if he were available" which is different than "I would like to have him, if he were available."

Mr. Laz

02-27-2012, 09:45 AM

look at parker trying hard to prove the Chiefs should lose a draft pick so he can bitch some more.

Epic Fail 007

02-27-2012, 09:47 AM

The main difference I see is both the Gunther quote and the NFL tampering example include the individual stating they want the player. "I would like to be there to catch a lot of them" and "we'd very much like to have him if he were available" indicate wanting the player and signing him if available.

Crennel's quote didn't go that far. He said "I would be crazy not to consider it, if he were available" which is different than "I would like to have him, if he were available."

Your right. Someone should tell the idiots at the star this.

Sofa King

02-27-2012, 09:53 AM

Wow poe runs a 4.87 at 346. I would not mind at all if chiefs drafted him.

There's nothing i like to see more in my NT's than high end sprinting speed.

Mr_Tomahawk

02-27-2012, 10:35 AM

Bob Glauber ‏ @BobGlauber
Told Colts not inclined to pursue tampering charges at this point re: Crennel comments on Peyton. League can pursue issue if it chooses.

philfree

02-27-2012, 10:40 AM

Bob Glauber ‏ @BobGlauber
Told Colts not inclined to pursue tampering charges at this point re: Crennel comments on Peyton. League can pursue issue if it chooses.

What about Miami? What Romeo said about Henne was more tampering then what he said about Manning IMO.

Let's just hope it goes away.

Okie_Apparition

02-27-2012, 10:46 AM

When you got 5 rings
people give you the benefit of the doubt

htismaqe

02-27-2012, 10:47 AM

look at parker trying hard to prove the Chiefs should lose a draft pick so he can bitch some more.

Did you even read what I said? I'm not bitching about anything and have actually been fairly positive about all things Chief for a couple of weeks now.

It's not me who has tunnel vision here.

htismaqe

02-27-2012, 10:49 AM

The main difference I see is both the Gunther quote and the NFL tampering example include the individual stating they want the player. "I would like to be there to catch a lot of them" and "we'd very much like to have him if he were available" indicate wanting the player and signing him if available.

Crennel's quote didn't go that far. He said "I would be crazy not to consider it, if he were available" which is different than "I would like to have him, if he were available."

That makes some sense.

I certainly hope it works out in the Chiefs' favor but the arbitrary way the NFL applies these rules is ridiculously maddening.

Rausch

02-27-2012, 10:50 AM

That's not tampering.

Complimenting a woman isn't the same as saying you want dirty seggs in the rain.

htismaqe

02-27-2012, 11:07 AM

ESPN Radio is still reporting this as one of its main headlines during the Sportscenter breaks. Totally crazy that Twitter has made ESPN obsolete when it comes to breaking news.

KurtCobain

02-27-2012, 11:09 AM

That's not tampering.

Complimenting a woman isn't the same as saying you want dirty seggs in the rain.

Why are you even acknowledging the bitch if you don't want dirty seggs in the rain?

Chiefnj2

02-27-2012, 12:06 PM

Here is the big difference between the Lions and Chiefs tampering:

"The tampering charges stem from comments Lions defensive coordinator Gunther Cunningham made to the Detroit Free Press about unnamed Chiefs players still under contract. The Lions were also deemed to have made "impermissible contact" with Chiefs safety Jarrad Page or his agent."

It's the 2nd sentence that is key. "Impermissible contact" with Page or his agent. It was more than Gunther's comment.

FAX

02-27-2012, 12:12 PM

Here is the big difference between the Lions and Chiefs tampering:

"The tampering charges stem from comments Lions defensive coordinator Gunther Cunningham made to the Detroit Free Press about unnamed Chiefs players still under contract. The Lions were also deemed to have made "impermissible contact" with Chiefs safety Jarrad Page or his agent."

It's the 2nd sentence that is key. "Impermissible contact" with Page or his agent. It was more than Gunther's comment.

Interesting. Thanks for posting this, Mr. Chiefnj2. I had never before heard of the "impermissible contact" part ... only the statement Gunther made regarding his interest in the Chiefs' defensive players.

I don't know if I feel good or bad about it, though. On the plus side, I'm glad there's no double standard. On the not-so-plus side, I still think that Romeo should defer any comments regarding his interest in contracted players during this period ... have there not been reports that the Chiefs have been in conversations with Manning's agent? I thought I saw that somewhere on the Planet.

FAX

Simplicity

02-27-2012, 12:28 PM

Did we ever lose draft picks because of "loose cannon" Haley?

I thought Romeo was supposed to be a "smart, safe hire?"

No, but we lost ****ing games because the idiot.

Coogs

02-27-2012, 12:44 PM

No unless I missed a quote from someone from Dallas confirming their interest.

No one from the cowboys has publicly said that they want Brandon Carr. Those are just reports that they are interested.

I know what you are saying, but for some publication (PFW) to be reporting this, someone within the orginazition must have relayed some info to a reporter (again from PFW). Only difference I really see here is this was not on camera/radio.

DaWolf

02-27-2012, 12:47 PM

What about Miami? What Romeo said about Henne was more tampering then what he said about Manning IMO.

Let's just hope it goes away.

Pioli and Ireland are both Parcells guys. Would be surprised if anything happened on that front...

htismaqe

02-27-2012, 01:24 PM

Here is the big difference between the Lions and Chiefs tampering:

"The tampering charges stem from comments Lions defensive coordinator Gunther Cunningham made to the Detroit Free Press about unnamed Chiefs players still under contract. The Lions were also deemed to have made "impermissible contact" with Chiefs safety Jarrad Page or his agent."

It's the 2nd sentence that is key. "Impermissible contact" with Page or his agent. It was more than Gunther's comment.

Right. The Lions weren't charged with tampering because of Gunther's comment alone.

FAX

02-27-2012, 01:28 PM

So ... what is "impermissible contact", gentlemen?

Again, there are reports (in a thread right here on the Planet) that the Chiefs and Manning's agent have had discussions. I'm just curious about where they draw the line. If the player's agent rings you on the phone, are you supposed to hang up on the guy and immediately report the call?

I guess they could establish some kind of double standard for Manning, though. It wouldn't be the first time the league did that for him.

FAX

Mr. Laz

02-27-2012, 01:45 PM

Colts not inclined to file tampering charges against Chiefs

Posted by Mike Florio on February 27, 2012, 3:31 PM EST

Getty Images
Chiefs coach Romeo Crennel committed an apparent violation of the tampering rules by telling the media on Friday that he “would be crazy not to consider [Peyton Manning] if he’s available.”

Given that the tampering rules prohibit at page 3 “[a]ny public or private statement of interest, qualified or unqualified, in another club’s player to that player’s agent or representative, or to a member of the news media,” and that the NFL’s anti-tampering policy provides as an example a very similar remark (“He’s an excellent player, and we’d very much like to have him if he were available, but another club holds his rights.”), the Colts could make a tampering claim, if the Colts choose to make a tampering claim.

Bob Glauber of Newsday reported on Monday via Twitter that the Colts are “not inclined” to pursue tampering charges against the Chiefs. As Glauber points out, the league can pursue the matter on its own, if the league so chooses. (As we pointed out in an earlier item, that’s precisely what the NFL did after Albert Haynesworth signed as a free agent with the Redskins.)

The league won’t comment, and its precedent of investigation and enforcement in past situations sheds no light on whether action will be taken.

Mr. Laz

02-27-2012, 01:46 PM

sounds like Crennel did screw up and better just keep his mouth shut

htismaqe

02-27-2012, 01:49 PM

Colts not inclined to file tampering charges against Chiefs

Posted by Mike Florio on February 27, 2012, 3:31 PM EST

Getty Images
Chiefs coach Romeo Crennel committed an apparent violation of the tampering rules by telling the media on Friday that he “would be crazy not to consider [Peyton Manning] if he’s available.”

Given that the tampering rules prohibit at page 3 “[a]ny public or private statement of interest, qualified or unqualified, in another club’s player to that player’s agent or representative, or to a member of the news media,” and that the NFL’s anti-tampering policy provides as an example a very similar remark (“He’s an excellent player, and we’d very much like to have him if he were available, but another club holds his rights.”), the Colts could make a tampering claim, if the Colts choose to make a tampering claim.

Bob Glauber of Newsday reported on Monday via Twitter that the Colts are “not inclined” to pursue tampering charges against the Chiefs. As Glauber points out, the league can pursue the matter on its own, if the league so chooses. (As we pointed out in an earlier item, that’s precisely what the NFL did after Albert Haynesworth signed as a free agent with the Redskins.)

The league won’t comment, and its precedent of investigation and enforcement in past situations sheds no light on whether action will be taken.

Good.

But there's still a chance the NFL could do something and we still haven't heard anything from the Dolphins, right?

I tend to agree with Petro - the NFL makes these coaches and GMs available to the media at the scouting combine. If they don't want these kinds of things to happen, don't make them available. As it is, if they get asked a question, they should be able to answer.

They've put guys like Romeo in a no-win situation - if he doesn't answer or says "no comment" he's being an asshole to the media. If he does answer, he's tampering.

ChiefRocka

02-27-2012, 01:50 PM

Only RAC didn't say we'd like to have him if available...he said we'd be crazy not to consider him if available"

RAC may have saved face with his opening statement acknowledging the tampering rules. Believe you me Pioli and RAC discussed and rehearsed what was to be said.

htismaqe

02-27-2012, 01:50 PM

sounds like Crennel did screw up and better just keep his mouth shut

While I agree, the NFL should also stop encouraging teams to do interviews at public events like the combine.

They want the coaches and GMs to be out there and contribute to the 24x7x365 NFL frenzy but then they want to strictly monitor everything they say to the point where they just shouldn't talk.

It's really dumb on the NFL's part.

FAX

02-27-2012, 01:56 PM

See? That's what I feared ... that all that's required is a public "statement" which can be construed as soliciting a player by expressing an interest. That's really all Gunther did (other than the "inappropriate contact" part - which I still don't understand, or even know what that was) and it sounds like that's all it takes.

It seems like Crennel's kind of walking the razor's edge, here.

FAX

FAX

02-27-2012, 02:01 PM

Good.

But there's still a chance the NFL could do something and we still haven't heard anything from the Dolphins, right?

I tend to agree with Petro - the NFL makes these coaches and GMs available to the media at the scouting combine. If they don't want these kinds of things to happen, don't make them available. As it is, if they get asked a question, they should be able to answer.

They've put guys like Romeo in a no-win situation - if he doesn't answer or says "no comment" he's being an asshole to the media. If he does answer, he's tampering.

Either the Colts or the Phins, I guess. Or, of course, the NFL itself.

It remains to be seen where the boot up the ass might come from ... and to whom said boot might belong. If, on the other hand, Crennel doesn't skate on account of the fact that he's generally viewed as a nice guy whereas Gunther is generally viewed as a raving lunatic.

The funny thing is that everybody knows that a lot of teams would be interested in Manning. That's no secret. Henne? ... that's another matter entirely.

FAX

Pasta Giant Meatball

02-27-2012, 02:16 PM

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/34988765

Nice investigation, Teicher.

LMAO at the people bitching before this.

Mr. Laz

02-27-2012, 02:17 PM

Only RAC didn't say we'd like to have him if available...he said we'd be crazy not to consider him if available"

RAC may have saved face with his opening statement acknowledging the tampering rules. Believe you me Pioli and RAC discussed and rehearsed what was to be said.hopefully that saves us

mdstu

02-27-2012, 02:30 PM

LMAO at the people bitching before this.

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/34988765

Nice investigation, Teicher.

Anyone notice that the article has changed?

An NFL spokesman told CBSSports.com that the league will not comment on potential tampering charges

Ed. Note: A previous version of this story contained a comment from the NFL that was the result of a miscommunication. We apologize for the error.

Brock

02-27-2012, 02:33 PM

Anyone notice that the article has changed?

An NFL spokesman told CBSSports.com that the league will not comment on potential tampering charges

Ed. Note: A previous version of this story contained a comment from the NFL that was the result of a miscommunication. We apologize for the error.

In other words, we have to wait and see if anybody pitches a fit before we decide if it's tampering or not.

Chiefnj2

02-27-2012, 02:35 PM

You know exactly what was going on in Romeo's mind when they asked that question:

It appears to me that, if anyone REALLY wanted to push the issue, RAC screwed up. That said, it seems a little extreme that a coach can't even say "Yes, I'd like to have Peyton Manning on my team." without that violating the rule. Free agency would be more fun if coaches could comment on who they're going after.

mdstu

02-27-2012, 02:37 PM

In other words, we have to wait and see if anybody pitches a fit before we decide if it's tampering or not.

Yep, didn't take them long to retract their previous comme ..err miscommunication.

DaWolf

02-27-2012, 02:59 PM

I wouldn't be surprised to see the league fine Crennel for the comments just to make a point and attempt to make it look like they are enforcing their own bylaws. I'd be surprised to see draft picks affected unless a team files charges (and because I'd be surprised to see Goodell come straight out and slap Clark Hunt for this)...

htismaqe

02-27-2012, 04:12 PM

In other words, we have to wait and see if anybody pitches a fit before we decide if it's tampering or not.

Yeah, another example of the NFL arbitrarily applying the rules.

whoman69

02-27-2012, 04:27 PM

I believe it will be a fine for the coach and the team

FAX

02-27-2012, 05:17 PM

Anyone notice that the article has changed?

An NFL spokesman told CBSSports.com that the league will not comment on potential tampering charges

Ed. Note: A previous version of this story contained a comment from the NFL that was the result of a miscommunication. We apologize for the error.